Text and/or other creative content from this version of Monadnock was copied or moved into Inselberg with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
I think that this article should be merged with inselberg, with the exception of the origin of the name, the material covered is nearly identical -- Leonsimms 18:41, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Are Tepuis a type of Monadnock? If so, should the be added to the list? -- NoahElhardt 02:44, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
As the US is the only country to refer to these formations as monadnocks, with inselbergs being more widely used I think this article should be moved to the title "Inselberg" and the terminology changed accordingly. -- Brideshead (leave a message) 22:30, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
As a late-comer, I would still point out that a) The main US use (if monadnock indeed be the main use) must not be confused with the main overall English use, and that very few non-USanians would be likely to search with what appears to be a Native-American term. Even "Kopje" is likely to be more internationally popular. b) An argument above that English terms should be prefered above German, is entirely specious, because both terms are loan words foreign to the English language. In fact, "Inselberg" arguably has the better claim of being English through the close relation between German and English, the (I presume) earlier borrowing, and (as already stated) greater international use.
Generally, I feel that many USanians are in the unfortunate habit of equating correct English with "American", see US culture as the natural basis for the English WP, etc. This is a complete misunderstanding: The English WP is the English language WP, not the US national WP. 188.100.206.102 ( talk) 13:01, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Several references here were url-code only (no other information provided) and fell on deadlinks; I removed these and some of the information they supposedly supported. I also removed the section on flora, as it pertained specifically to flora in Australia, not to inselbergs/monadnocks in general. Perhaps this material could be reintroduced in a more limited and less narrowly-aimed fashion. I also removed some information that was not supported by references, and left citation tags in front of others.
I proveded references that demonstrate the use of the term monadnock, although I have no problem with this article being called inselberg instead. One term is as good as another. I also added information showing subtle distinctions between the two terms. However, the general non-consenus among geologists indicated by the material and references provided should caution any absolute definition here in this article.
I don't object to the reintroduction of some of the material I cut out, but please do provide good references and do make sure that the material is germaine to the entire topic, i.e. it should not be phrased in such a way as to favor one geologic opinion over another.
Finally, I removed the long list of examples to List of inselbergs, (favoring the broader, non-USA specific term), per WP:NOT and I reworked the image formatting and over-clustering. -- Pgagnon999 ( talk) 02:12, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Regarding the interchangeability of the two terms, see this german-english engineering dictionary (electronic scan of print): here And here in this British geology text and here in the Dictionary of Mining, Mineral, and Related Terms published by the American Geological Institute-- Pgagnon999 ( talk) 02:20, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
And see here in this USDA glossary regarding the subtle distinction between the two that some geologic opinions ascribe to; and here by a geologist who considers the two to be interchangeable, page 7, second column: " There is a general homology between all (fluvially sculpted) landscapes. The differences between landforms of humid-temperate, semiarid, and arid environments are differences only of degree. Thus, for instance, monadnocks and inselbergs are homologous."-- Pgagnon999 ( talk) 02:42, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Surely two of the most impressive examples must be Ayer's rock or The Olgas in Australia. Could they be included or am I mistaken that they are not monadnocks? Brinerustle ( talk) 18:41, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
According to Whittow's Physical Geography, the terms "monadnock" and "inselberg" are not synonymous. Under "inselberg" we read "Although it may appear to bear a morphological resemblance to a monadnock [an inselberg] is thought to be derived by the process of parallel retreat of slopes in which pediments encroach into residual uplands during the process of pediplanation. The inselberg is the end product of this encroachment and may occur as an isolated hill or in a residual group of hills." It then goes on to distinguish between a "bornhordt" and other formations. By contrast the "monadnock" is "an isolated hill or type of residual due to denudation which has left it rising conspicuously above a gently rolling plain ... usually but not necessarily related to an outcrop of more resistant rocks...". I therefore suggest we create a separate article on "inselberg", highlighting the difference and providing cross-references. -- Bermicourt ( talk) 16:19, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
The word Kopje is not used in Southern Africa. Koppie, yes, but not Kopje. Dutch is not a language spoken in Southern Africa.-- Michael ( talk) 17:16, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
This article is about a geomorpholgical feature. Monadnock and inselberg are synonyms. It is the geomorphological and geological literature that is relevant when deciding the name of the article. Becuase I see some older inactive discussions in the this talk page about the name I will explain my rationale for renaming the article inselberg here.
-- Lappspira ( talk) 13:45, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved. The consensus is that the proposed title is more common in modern sources and that ENGVAR does not apply in this case, though it should be noted it can apply to titles. Note that a history swap also had to be performed in order to preserve some attribution history. Jenks24 ( talk) 16:52, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
Monadnock →
Inselberg – per the most common and geographically most distributed use in relevant scientific literature.
Lappspira (
talk) 13:53, 12 September 2015 (UTC) Relisted.
Jenks24 (
talk)
12:42, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Inselberg/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
Almost B class but the second paragraph under Geology (i.e. "Twidale C.R. 1981 Granite Inselbergs") needs to be rewritten for better coherency. RedWolf ( talk) 16:13, 16 May 2010 (UTC) |
Last edited at 16:53, 28 September 2015 (UTC). Substituted at 18:57, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
I am surprised in the etymology section of monadnock it does not point out that "monad" is defined as "a single unit, the number one" and the origin of "nock" is Late Middle English, possibly from Middle Dutch "nocke" meaning "point or tip." Therefore the word "monadnock" could be translated as "single point," which sounds a lot like "an isolated rock hill, knob, ridge, or small mountain that rises abruptly from a gently sloping or virtually level surrounding plain." Mseanbrown ( talk) 07:21, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
References
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Inselberg. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 05:55, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
Would Huerfano Butte count?-- Kintetsubuffalo ( talk) 06:48, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
Section Geology mentions volcanic and sedimentary composition, it also mentions nearby plateaus. To my knowledge sedimentary inselbergs may relate to plateaus in the vicinity, volcanic inselbergs do not. Should this be wrong, the relation between volcanic inselbergs and plateaus would need to be described explicitly. I assume this is just bad writing, but I don't know for sure. Tomdo08 ( talk) 00:22, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
Text and/or other creative content from this version of Monadnock was copied or moved into Inselberg with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I think that this article should be merged with inselberg, with the exception of the origin of the name, the material covered is nearly identical -- Leonsimms 18:41, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Are Tepuis a type of Monadnock? If so, should the be added to the list? -- NoahElhardt 02:44, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
As the US is the only country to refer to these formations as monadnocks, with inselbergs being more widely used I think this article should be moved to the title "Inselberg" and the terminology changed accordingly. -- Brideshead (leave a message) 22:30, 26 October 2008 (UTC)
As a late-comer, I would still point out that a) The main US use (if monadnock indeed be the main use) must not be confused with the main overall English use, and that very few non-USanians would be likely to search with what appears to be a Native-American term. Even "Kopje" is likely to be more internationally popular. b) An argument above that English terms should be prefered above German, is entirely specious, because both terms are loan words foreign to the English language. In fact, "Inselberg" arguably has the better claim of being English through the close relation between German and English, the (I presume) earlier borrowing, and (as already stated) greater international use.
Generally, I feel that many USanians are in the unfortunate habit of equating correct English with "American", see US culture as the natural basis for the English WP, etc. This is a complete misunderstanding: The English WP is the English language WP, not the US national WP. 188.100.206.102 ( talk) 13:01, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Several references here were url-code only (no other information provided) and fell on deadlinks; I removed these and some of the information they supposedly supported. I also removed the section on flora, as it pertained specifically to flora in Australia, not to inselbergs/monadnocks in general. Perhaps this material could be reintroduced in a more limited and less narrowly-aimed fashion. I also removed some information that was not supported by references, and left citation tags in front of others.
I proveded references that demonstrate the use of the term monadnock, although I have no problem with this article being called inselberg instead. One term is as good as another. I also added information showing subtle distinctions between the two terms. However, the general non-consenus among geologists indicated by the material and references provided should caution any absolute definition here in this article.
I don't object to the reintroduction of some of the material I cut out, but please do provide good references and do make sure that the material is germaine to the entire topic, i.e. it should not be phrased in such a way as to favor one geologic opinion over another.
Finally, I removed the long list of examples to List of inselbergs, (favoring the broader, non-USA specific term), per WP:NOT and I reworked the image formatting and over-clustering. -- Pgagnon999 ( talk) 02:12, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Regarding the interchangeability of the two terms, see this german-english engineering dictionary (electronic scan of print): here And here in this British geology text and here in the Dictionary of Mining, Mineral, and Related Terms published by the American Geological Institute-- Pgagnon999 ( talk) 02:20, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
And see here in this USDA glossary regarding the subtle distinction between the two that some geologic opinions ascribe to; and here by a geologist who considers the two to be interchangeable, page 7, second column: " There is a general homology between all (fluvially sculpted) landscapes. The differences between landforms of humid-temperate, semiarid, and arid environments are differences only of degree. Thus, for instance, monadnocks and inselbergs are homologous."-- Pgagnon999 ( talk) 02:42, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
Surely two of the most impressive examples must be Ayer's rock or The Olgas in Australia. Could they be included or am I mistaken that they are not monadnocks? Brinerustle ( talk) 18:41, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
According to Whittow's Physical Geography, the terms "monadnock" and "inselberg" are not synonymous. Under "inselberg" we read "Although it may appear to bear a morphological resemblance to a monadnock [an inselberg] is thought to be derived by the process of parallel retreat of slopes in which pediments encroach into residual uplands during the process of pediplanation. The inselberg is the end product of this encroachment and may occur as an isolated hill or in a residual group of hills." It then goes on to distinguish between a "bornhordt" and other formations. By contrast the "monadnock" is "an isolated hill or type of residual due to denudation which has left it rising conspicuously above a gently rolling plain ... usually but not necessarily related to an outcrop of more resistant rocks...". I therefore suggest we create a separate article on "inselberg", highlighting the difference and providing cross-references. -- Bermicourt ( talk) 16:19, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
The word Kopje is not used in Southern Africa. Koppie, yes, but not Kopje. Dutch is not a language spoken in Southern Africa.-- Michael ( talk) 17:16, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
This article is about a geomorpholgical feature. Monadnock and inselberg are synonyms. It is the geomorphological and geological literature that is relevant when deciding the name of the article. Becuase I see some older inactive discussions in the this talk page about the name I will explain my rationale for renaming the article inselberg here.
-- Lappspira ( talk) 13:45, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved. The consensus is that the proposed title is more common in modern sources and that ENGVAR does not apply in this case, though it should be noted it can apply to titles. Note that a history swap also had to be performed in order to preserve some attribution history. Jenks24 ( talk) 16:52, 28 September 2015 (UTC)
Monadnock →
Inselberg – per the most common and geographically most distributed use in relevant scientific literature.
Lappspira (
talk) 13:53, 12 September 2015 (UTC) Relisted.
Jenks24 (
talk)
12:42, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Inselberg/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
Almost B class but the second paragraph under Geology (i.e. "Twidale C.R. 1981 Granite Inselbergs") needs to be rewritten for better coherency. RedWolf ( talk) 16:13, 16 May 2010 (UTC) |
Last edited at 16:53, 28 September 2015 (UTC). Substituted at 18:57, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
I am surprised in the etymology section of monadnock it does not point out that "monad" is defined as "a single unit, the number one" and the origin of "nock" is Late Middle English, possibly from Middle Dutch "nocke" meaning "point or tip." Therefore the word "monadnock" could be translated as "single point," which sounds a lot like "an isolated rock hill, knob, ridge, or small mountain that rises abruptly from a gently sloping or virtually level surrounding plain." Mseanbrown ( talk) 07:21, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
References
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Inselberg. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 05:55, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
Would Huerfano Butte count?-- Kintetsubuffalo ( talk) 06:48, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
Section Geology mentions volcanic and sedimentary composition, it also mentions nearby plateaus. To my knowledge sedimentary inselbergs may relate to plateaus in the vicinity, volcanic inselbergs do not. Should this be wrong, the relation between volcanic inselbergs and plateaus would need to be described explicitly. I assume this is just bad writing, but I don't know for sure. Tomdo08 ( talk) 00:22, 13 January 2018 (UTC)